Dataset Information

Oligometastatic head and neck cancer: Which patients benefit from radical local treatment of all tumour sites?

ABSTRACT:

Background

There is a large lack of evidence for optimal treatment in oligometastatic head and neck cancer and it is especially unclear which patients benefit from radical local treatment of all tumour sites.

Methods

40 patients with newly diagnosed oligometastatic head and neck cancer received radical local treatment of all tumour sites from 14.02.2008 to 24.08.2018. Primary endpoint was overall survival. Time to occurrence of new distant metastases and local control were evaluated as secondary endpoints as well as prognostic factors in univariate und multivariate Cox's regression analysis. To investigate the impact of total tumour volume on survival, all tumour sites were segmented on baseline imaging.

Results

Radical local treatment included radiotherapy in 90% of patients, surgery in 25% and radiofrequency ablation in 3%. Median overall survival from first diagnosis of oligometastatic disease was 23.0 months, 2-year survival was 48%, 3-year survival was 37%, 4-year survival was 24% and 5-year survival was 16%. Median time to occurrence of new distant metastases was 11.6 months with freedom from new metastases showing a tail pattern after 3 years of follow-up (22% at 3, 4- and 5-years post-treatment). In multivariate analysis, better ECOG status, absence of bone and brain metastases and lower total tumour volume were significantly associated with improved survival, whereas the number of metastases and involved organ sites was not.

Conclusions

Radical local treatment in oligometastatic head and neck cancer shows promising outcomes and needs to be further pursued. Patients with good performance status, absence of brain and bone metastases and low total tumour volume were identified as optimal candidates for radical local treatment in oligometastatic head and neck cancer and should be considered for selection in future prospective trials.

SUBMITTER: Weissmann T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8011153 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe incidence of pancreatic cancer continues to rise globally, with pancreatic head cancer accounting for nearly 60-70%. Pancreatic head cancer occurs mainly in people over the age of 60, and its morbidity and mortality increase with age. We investigated whether these elderly patients with nondistant metastases would benefit more from expanded pancreaticoduodenectomy (EPD) compared with standard pancreaticoduodenectomy (SPD).Methods3317 elderly patients with pancreatic head cancer from the SEER database were included in the study based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These patients were divided into a nonsurgical group and surgical group (including EPD and SPD). Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were applied to identify the independent risk factors for cancer-specific survival (CSS). The survival differences between the nonsurgical group and surgical group were compared. Propensity score matching (PSM) methods were applied to balance covariates and reduce the interference of confounding variables. The two groups of patients were matched in a 1 : 1 ratio, and the covariates between the two groups were compared to verify the matching validity. The survival difference in different groups was compared after the matching analysis.Results3317 enrolled patients were divided into the surgical group (n = 984) and nonsurgical group (n = 2333). Before PSM, there were significant differences in overall survival (OS) and CSS between the nonsurgical group and surgical group (median OS: 8 months vs. 20 months, P < 0.001; median CSS: 8 months vs. 22 months, P < 0.001). The multivariate CSS Cox regression analysis demonstrated surgery is an independent risk factor. However, no significant differences were founded between the SPD and EPD groups (median OS: 20 months vs. 22 months, P=0.636; median CSS: 22 months vs. 22 months, P=0.270). After PSM, there were also no significant differences in OS and CSS between the SPD and EPD groups (median OS: 23 months vs. 18 months, P=0.415; median CSS: 26 months vs. 18 months, P=0.329).ConclusionThis study uses PSM to evaluate the effects of EPD and SPD for elderly patients with nondistant metastatic pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. It found that surgery is an independent prognostic factor, but expanded surgery has no survival advantage for these patients, whereas SPD provides a better survival advantage than EPD. SPD is a reasonable treatment option for these patients.

Project description:BackgroundIn certain malignancies, patients with oligometastatic disease benefit from radical ablative or surgical treatment. The SABR-COMET trial demonstrated a survival benefit for oligometastatic patients randomized to local stereotactic ablative radiation (SABR) compared to patients receiving standard care (SC) alone. Our aim was to determine the cost-effectiveness of SABR.Materials and methodsA decision model based on partitioned survival simulations estimated costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) associated with both strategies in a United States setting from a health care perspective. Analyses were performed over the trial duration of six years as well as a long-term horizon of 16 years. Model input parameters were based on the SABR-COMET trial data as well as best available and most recent data provided in the published literature. An annual discount of 3% for costs was implemented in the analysis. All costs were adjusted to 2019 US Dollars according to the United States Consumer Price Index. SABR costs were reported with an average of $11,700 per treatment. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. Incremental costs, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated. The willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set to $100,000/QALY.ResultsBased on increased overall and progression-free survival, the SABR group showed 0.78 incremental QALYs over the trial duration and 1.34 incremental QALYs over the long-term analysis. Treatment with SABR led to a marginal increase in costs compared to SC alone (SABR: $304,656; SC: $303,523 for 6 years; ICER $1,446/QALY and SABR: $402,888; SC: $350,708 for long-term analysis; ICER $38,874/QALY). Therapy with SABR remained cost-effective until treatment costs of $88,969 over the trial duration (i.e. 7.6 times the average cost). Sensitivity analysis identified a strong model impact for ongoing annual costs of oligo- and polymetastatic disease states.ConclusionOur analysis suggests that local treatment with SABR adds QALYs for patients with certain oligometastatic cancers and represents an intermediate- and long-term cost-effective treatment strategy.

Project description:BACKGROUND:To evaluate a knowledge based planning model for RapidPlan (RP) generated for advanced head and neck cancer (HNC) patient treatments, as well its ability to possibly improve the clinical plan quality. The stability of the model was assessed also for a different beam geometry, different dose fractionation and different management of bilateral structures (parotids). METHODS:Dosimetric and geometric data from plans of 83 patients presenting HNC were selected for the model training. All the plans used volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT, RapidArc) to treat two targets at dose levels of 69.96 and 54.45 Gy in 33 fractions with simultaneous integrated boost. Two models were generated, the first separating the ipsi- and contra-lateral parotids, while the second associating the two parotids to a single structure for training. The optimization objectives were adjusted to the final model to better translate the institutional planning and dosimetric strategies and trade-offs. The models were validated on 20 HNC patients, comparing the RP generated plans and the clinical plans. RP generated plans were also compared between the clinical beam arrangement and a simpler geometry, as well as for a different fractionation scheme. RESULTS:RP improved significantly the clinical plan quality, with a reduction of 2 Gy, 5 Gy, and 10 Gy of the mean parotid, oral cavity and laryngeal doses, respectively. A simpler beam geometry was deteriorating the plan quality, but in a small amount, keeping a significant improvement relative to the clinical plan. The two models, with one or two parotid structures, showed very similar results. NTCP evaluations indicated the possibility of improving (NTCP decreasing of about 7%) the toxicity profile when using the RP solution. CONCLUSIONS:The HNC RP model showed improved plan quality and planning stability for beam geometry and fractionation. An adequate choice of the objectives in the model is necessary for the trade-offs strategies.